Across the River and into the Pub.

Disclaimer: this post begins with an explanation of my position on religion. I go into such detail not so as to begin a discussion on religion but so as to enable the reader to draw a clear picture of my beliefs on this topic. I understand that the reader may be swayed to comment on religion itself, but as the argument is of a different nature, and as I use religion only as a point to make an example for my greater argument in this case, I humbly ask that the ensuing discussion be kept free of religion. If you as a reader wish to further the discussion on religion, please send me an email and we can do it in private, something of which I am only too happy to do.

I am an anti-theist. For those of you unfamilar with the term it defines someone who not only does not believe in the idea of god, but who is opposed also to the idea of religion itself. I find the entire concept of religion and faith to be deeply insulting, and talking to a priest or other layman can induce the feeling of wanting to throw up in my own mouth, (which can be tricky seeing as I live in a small mountain village in Italy).

I do not like anything to do with religion, be it a church or an altar, a priest or a nun, a veil or a cassok, a ritual or a celebration. I particularly detest funerals as I am forced to go to those due to both wishing to pay my respect to the deceased and attempting to give comfort to the bereaved, whilst simultaneously having to suffer the stupifyingly stupid and insulting speeches from the clergy that drone on for so long as to cause birds to drop from the sky. It is also my sincere belief that the world would be a better place without religion. In short, religion gives me the shits.

So let us now turn our attention to WoW. And let us assume that I were the type of individual who felt that it was their duty to impose their own political and moral viewpoint onto the game enjoyed and played by millions of people around the world. Imagine if you will the list of examples that I could draw up, similar to that written over at mentalshaman with regards to feminism. We could start with the Cathedral in Stormwind, and the entire Cathedral district. We could move on to entire character classes, the priest, paladin and shaman. It would not be difficult for me to gather a great many examples to support my argument for the imposition of anti-theist elements within the game to at least balance out the biased and irritating examples of theism and religion found all over and throughout the World of Warcraft.

Now I want you to imagine if you will, that I actually wrote this list, on this blog. Imagine that I gained a notable following and a good deal of vocal support about this. Imagine that Blizzard actually made a few changes in-game to satisfy this outside pressure group. How would you feel, knowing that your game that you play and love had had to bow to political correctness from the real world? How would you feel when you saw one of these elements in-game, whether something added or something taken out? I know how I would feel: it would yank me from my immersion in a fantasy world that I use as an escape from the real world and place me back into that real world. And it would thus make me very sad and upset.

I can tell you right now, from the position of being a vehement anti-theist, that I would be just as vocal in my opposition to this if it came about as I have been to the argument of imposing feminist elements merely for the sake of having them there. There is no place for the imposition of real world special interest groups and their agenda’s, whether good or bad, onto a place that we all use as an escape to have fun and relax. And more to the point, if one group gained representation in this way then any other group would have equal claim to have their own issues and demands met. And fairly soon our game would not be about changing it to balance this class over another, (never at the expense of rogues!), but about which group had more representation, a balancing act that can only lead to inanity in its apparent search for equality.

If this outcome would seem outlandish to you, know that every large movement in history, every change whether for good or bad has had its genisis in such small and seemingly innocuous steps. Which is why when I saw that post on mentalshaman and the responses to it, as well as further posts echoing throughout the blogosphere, I felt compelled to act. Blogs are not private, as some commentators have stated, attempting to insinuate that I had no place bringing my unwelcome attitudes into a “private” discussion. Your blog is private if it requires a password in order to access it. If not, then it is just as public as the bbc news website, and therefore both able to spread its ideas at a rapid rate and also be up for discussion. I have, amongst many other unwelcome accusations, been accused of being filled with rage. My posts have been attempted to be dismissed as the ravings of a demented bigot. Accusations which I fully expected to come, though perhaps to be honest not quite so thick and fast. So why do this? Because it can be very difficult to draw attention to the other side of this argument, even if in doing so one is often attacked by liberals whose usual method when faced with an opponent is to identify your lowest possible motive and then claim it as being your only possible one. Which of course has happened to me here.

The upshot of all this, and the idea that I would like to leave on this matter is that Blizzard did not design this game for males. It did not design it for females. Nor was it designed for people of a religious persuasion or those being against religion. It was not designed for the young or for the old, for the rich or for the poor, for the gay or the straight. It was not designed with people with special needs in mind nor for people with specific political view-points. It was not designed for people from specific creeds or countries.

It was designed for gamers. We are all gamers. We all have that in common, and our common interest and love brings us together. By seeking to raise one group of gamers above the other by placing their needs as special then we shatter that image of equality. We are all the same in the game, that is the truly wonderful and amazing thing. You are not discriminated for whom you are. You are judged and valued on what you can bring to the game. It is why I have played this game and games like it for so long. And I will always fight to protect its preciousness.

Well, the thing is, your hypothetical example wouldn’t upset me either. I might disagree and find it odd, but it definitely wouldn’t “yank me from my immersion”. After all, the concept of religion already exists in Azeroth; if it took a different direction, why not? If enough players wanted it and Blizzard considered it a good idea, why not?

You always talk about outside influences as if WoW was something completely disconnected from the real world. It’s not though. Yes, there’s magic and elves, but everything else that we take for granted – people, gravity, trees – that’s all based on real things and can be discussed in context.

I also don’t understand your obsession with putting people into “special interest group” boxes. If rogues get nerfed and paladins get buffed, do you also bemoan the fact that the needs of paladin players were placed as special? Or do you just treat it as normal evolution of the game, even if you don’t personally agree with it?

Building off this, the devs have looked at class percentages and taken active steps to change that. As we speak the devs are already changing who plays what. Does this knowledge shatter your sense of immersion?

Your logic is flawed. Changing in-game stuff for ingame reasons is not the same as changing in game stuff for out of game reasons.

The Human culture in WoW is based on medieval times and thus, the fameles take the more traditional, stay at home roles. The orcish culture is savage and brutish so those with bigger physical strength are on top of the food chain. This is not sexism, this is fiction.

The only thing that i could agree on changing is the appearance of female armor, and that is something that has allready changed a great deal since Vanilla and BC.

“… And fairly soon our game would not be about changing it to balance this class over another, (never at the expense of rogues!), but about which group had more representation, a balancing act that can only lead to inanity in its apparent search for equality.”

The biggest mistake you make is considering WoW “your game”. “Don’t you touch MY game”, you say to feminists. It’s as much theirs as yours, because you and them accepted the same TOS which gives you 0% control of the game.

Now, if I was a very pro-religion and you somehow made Blizzard turn WoW into anti-theist game (“Kill 10 priests” quests, whatever), I would probably QQ on forums and then unsubscribe. So would all people whose religious feelings were hurt over certain treshold.
Thus, submitting to your ungodly influence, Blizzard would punish itself by losing customer base.

Hence: the only “control group” that Blizzard is going to submit to is 50% of playerbase plus 1 player. And if that many anti-theists are playing WoW, then there is really no place for priests, shamen and paladins there.

Yes, therefore, Blizzard shouldn’t cave to the feminists demands, and they won’t. That doesn’t mean Adam should write inflammatory anti-feminist posts, in fact it eliminates his justification for doing so, as the danger he is responding to is not a likely one.

Oh I see, he shouldn’t be discussing it because Blizzard will never give in to the feminists anyway.
So obviously the feminists shouldn’t be discussing it either because Blizzard will never give in to them. Or is that not the case?

“Oh I see, he shouldn’t be discussing it because Blizzard will never give in to the feminists anyway.
So obviously the feminists shouldn’t be discussing it either because Blizzard will never give in to them. Or is that not the case?”

Yes, like I already said multiple times, Blizzard won’t give in to the feminists, so they are wasting their time. Try reading my posts next time.

“How would you feel when you saw one of these elements in-game, whether something added or something taken out? I know how I would feel: it would yank me from my immersion in a fantasy world that I use as an escape from the real world and place me back into that real world. And it would thus make me very sad and upset.”

Feeling very sad and upset over having your immersion broken is EXACTLY WHAT THE PEOPLE YOU ARE DENOUNCING HAVE BEEN COMPLAINING ABOUT. You have been telling them to shut up and get out of your game, but it’s not your game. This hypocritical emotional basis for your posts is why they fail, it’s not letting you see the logical errors in the underpinning of your argument.

“There is no place for the imposition of real world special interest groups and their agenda’s, whether good or bad, onto a place that we all use as an escape to have fun and relax.”

This is not your call to make, via the exact same logic you have been using to tell the feminists to get our of your game. My response would be “There is no place for the imposition of Adam’s preferences about what should influence WoW , whether good or bad, onto a place that we all use as an escape to have fun and relax.” If you continue to phrase your arguments in a personal way, they will continue to fall into this circularity trap.

Gevlon’s post today is what your original post should have been. He makes your basic post without being emotionally defensive or offensive.

Ok, this is getting bloody moronic here. Would anyone care to tell me what part of wow, other than the slightly revealing female armor, which has allready greatly improved in that aspect from BC and Vanilla days is sexist?

What exactly are we talking about here, because frankly, i don’t see it.

NOTE: I DO NOT WANT insulty on my character, things like “you just dont get it” and “everyone has the same rights as you”.

I DO WANT a few straight up examples of what everyone is complaining about.

Come on Kurt, say something. Or are you waiting for the crickets to answer his question?

The real reason why you can’t get a straight answer? Because there isn’t one to give. Having come out in support of an indefensible position, the liberals have no logical arguments to make, and so they fell back on their tried-and-true method of derailing the conversation: calling names.
Now they’ve shot their load. They’ve already called us all bigots and accused us of hating women, and they’re utterly bewildered that we haven’t fallen back in disarray like everyone else they’ve ever tried that strategy on.

Thing is, i in no way consider myself conservative. In fact, i consider myself a pretty liberal person myself.

As for the democrat/republican debate, i usually cheer for the democrats, although we don’t have that type of division in my country directly.

The thing i hate is stupidity, irationality and mindless screaming, which is what this basically is. I fight against things like Intelligent Design, Anti vaccination movement and many other simmilar things for the same reason. It just pisses me off when i see people abandoning all reason and rejecting facts just because it’s easier to not understand them.

I have yet to see any concrete arguments from the “feminism” side. Right now, all i see is people on the other side making concise posts and then the people from the other side mostly saying stuff like “you are a bigot”, “you dont understand it”, “it’s not fair towards everyone”. Then there’s also people who support the other side simply because of the notion that if someone is saying anything even remotely against feminism, or against any sort of movement by any other special interest group, then he must be evil and we should be against him. It’s just argument for the sake of argument without really thinking what exactly they are arguing for.

PS: I apologise for the badly constructed sentences and bad grammar in general. English is not my first or even my second language, as i have never actually studied it in any way. I do hope that my message still comes through though.

Hey Nicola, your message comes through fine. I know what it is like to have to argue in a language that is not your own, it can be very tough, so well done. And I admire your ability to think for yourself and make rational decisions.

“Having come out in support of an indefensible position, the liberals have no logical arguments to make, and so they fell back on their tried-and-true method of derailing the conversation: calling names.”

No, you are the one calling names. You did it again in the quote above. I never called you a single name, sir.

As to Nikola’s question–I don’t see anyone remaining in the debate who is maintaining that WoW is sexist, they all gave up and left days ago. Well, I’ve said I agree with them that there are some sexist elements, but I’m certainly not a protester or a liberal, so I’m not sure why I’m obligated to go read the original post and sum it up for Nikola. Can’t he read it himself? If he reads the article and disagrees with, and posts what he disagrees with, I might feel like responding to that, but I’m not going to go summarize the original post for him like some paralegal without getting paid for it.

My main point is very simple: it’sinconsistent for Adam to tell “special interest groups” to butt out of WoW because there’s no place for their personal emotional crusades in WoW, when he makes the argument based on his personal emotional feelings. Where in making that point did I obligate myself to explain sexism in WoW to Nikola, Sjonnar? I will expect an answer within 45 standard minutes, or I will write a long senseless post insulting you for having nothing to say.

“They’ve already called us all bigots and accused us of hating women, and they’re utterly bewildered that we haven’t fallen back in disarray like everyone else they’ve ever tried that strategy on.”

“The upshot of all this, and the idea that I would like to leave on this matter is that Blizzard did not design this game for males. It did not design it for females. … It was not designed for people from specific creeds or countries.”

Well, you started this whole post by saying that Blizzard designed this game for young white males with certain preferences, and then saying that it should be left that way because that’s how you liked it, defending it emotionally. Now you are saying that it wasn’t designed to favor any special group, so we should leave it the way it is. ….what? No. You still have your original goal, but instead of stating the offensive emotional argument you actually believe, you prefer a bland fairyland imaginary argument you clearly don’t believe, which is clearly not true?

Everyone, even Gevlon, sees that this game was designed to particularly appeal to a certain subgroup of people. Some people want there to be more female representation? Some other people want mobile shaman totems, somehow. These changes will or won’t take place based on Blizzard’s decisions, which historically have always been obviously made for economic reasons. If the fact that Blizzard makes economic decisions and changes WoW to reflect what they want it to be bothers you, maybe you should just quit now?

“Because it can be very difficult to draw attention to the other side of this argument, even if in doing so one is often attacked by liberals whose usual method when faced with an opponent is to identify your lowest possible motive and then claim it as being your only possible one.”

The hypocrisy here is amazing. I’ve yet to see anyone here claim that they were a liberal. If the behavior quoted above defines what a liberal is, then the only liberal here IS YOU, which you have become since the quote above IS exactly what it derides.

If you think that everyone is the same in game, you are sorely mistaken.

Putting aside feminism, theism, and every other real life -ism, lets look at one prime example, that I am intimately familiar with – the ret paladin.

Would you say they are treated as equals? I hope your answer is “no” because, lol at us, we are not. We are the laughing stock of the game. Constantly berated because we chose to roll the class that “is the easiest”. LOLRET. RET-ARD. All of these have the meanings of being completely inadequate and insufficient, even mentally damaged, because we chose to roll, what historically is an icon in lore, and do damage with that. Never mind that we were complete nubs when we hit the create button, at the time, we fell in love with a class/spec combo, and are constantly, vehemently, and overtly berated for it.

And you know where it all stems from? The way the dev’s have created our class. We will be stuck with that label for a very long time, and there is absolutely NOTHING we can do about it but hold our head high and move on.

If you think we are the same, all equal, you are very sorely mistaken, indeed.

We are all the same as gamers because we have the freedom to choose and play any class that we want, (using your example here). Granted it may have unforseen consequences down the line, (as us rogues have had to deal with also from time to time), but you are always free to choose another spec or class in game.

I have played with some awesome ret paladins, both as skilled players and as personalities themselves. The classes will never be balanced, that is the ongoing process that keeps us here playing, but whether your ret pala is played by a guy or a girl or a gay or a straight or a black or a white was my point. All of those real world attributes don’t and should not have any influence on how a player is treated in game.

Well the trouble is the past of the particular class. Paladins have had a reputation for being the EZ mode for a long time largely because they’ve had a particular niche which hasn’t called for complexity.

Ret back in 1.0 was judge and then auto swing for a half hour and do terrible damage. Now that ret can do proper damage and is a little more complex it’s beginning to shake those perceptions although still has a way to go. Hopefully the cata changes will fix this.

I know the feeling though, I’ve played hunter as my main since vanilla and the amount of shit only got better when DK got released and all the kiddies went to play that instead😀.

Things seem to have drifted a bit. Are we talking about players or NPCs and lore? I’ve seen no claims that female players need special treatment in any way.

@Nikola
“Your logic is flawed. Changing in-game stuff for ingame reasons is not the same as changing in game stuff for out of game reasons.”
Either way it’s the game being changed for reasons beyond direct gameplay. If anything my sense of immersion would be ruined less by a few more female NPCs than by logging in to find that crusader strike suddenly does less damage or typhoon no longer dismounts flying people.

I don’t buy the “this is supposed to be medeival” argument. If it is supposed to reflect that culture, where are the bards, plagues, masses of peasants, and mostly rural/small town population? Human culture is more than a few steps removed from medeival times, so let’s not delude ourselves. Rather than pretending to be defenders of some lost time, why not be honest and say “we want things to be exactly as they are because change threatens us”?

What exactly dont you buy? It’s abviously a culture insipred by the medieaval age. You have castles, you have knights, you have kings. It is a culture where women, while not being opressed, arent exactly equal. In such a culture, it’s normal that more males are in a ruling position than females.

Its not sexist to tell a fictional story, no matter how dark the story is or how sexist the characters in it behave (which, by the way, they dont).

By your logic, any sort of fiction that doesnt describe a perfect utopia where everyone is always happy, equal and singing songs about bunnies should be banned.

Now im gonna ask again, what exactly about WoW, other than the older armors, is sexist?

I get that there’s some vague medieval thing going on, but since the world is clearly not exactly medieval, that means there has been picking and choosing of parts. I’m not sure how you read that as a demand for utopia.

@Sjonnar: Affirmative action in lore clearly makes no sense. But let’s not pretend that all stories are conceived in perfection and any changes are an abomination against Fiction. Maybe WoW would even have a more intersting story if it wasn’t male-dominated. In WC3 Jaina was an interesting character who changed the balance of power. In WoW she’s been steadily reduced to weeping at the feet of Varian.

“PC bullshit” is an interesting way to put it, because it indicates a way of not thinking which is so common: it’s different so it’s bullshit. What’s so bullshit about not perpetuating social problems?

The whole point is, it has been picking and choosing of parts to make up an interesting and compelling story, not to fill a quota.

Im willing to bet the writters didnt think “chicks suck and they should be in the kitchen, lets put that into our story”. It’s just a fictional story with fictional characters living in a fictional world with vairous fictional societies and values. There is nothing sexist or wrong in general about that.

I’m fine with changing and evolving the lore. Im fine with adding female characters. IM NOT fine with adding them just to make the number look right and because of politics. Don’t kid yourself, this isnt equality, this is politics.

You don’t create equality by evening the numbers. All you get that way is resentment from one side false values and ideas from the other side.
You dont make two groups of people equal by giving special treatment to one of them just because they are loud about it.

Now, as i said, regarding the non story related stuff like armors, im fine with changing that, but i also feel it has allready changed a great deal for the better since Vanilla and BC days. Im fine with chaning it further, but i also don’t think it’s that bad. Yes, all the females are pretty hot (if you ignore the low polygon count), but i dont see any fat men either. It’s a game about heroes in a fantasy world, and heroes need to be heroic and they need to look good while being it.

Klepsacovic: Pay attention, and maybe you wont look like such an idiot. Neither I nor Adam ever said that the story is perfect and shouldn’t be changed. We both said that the story should not be changed, and this is the important part, **solely for the purposes of kowtowing to a special interest group.**

Trying to put words in people’s mouths just makes you look like yet another slimy, manipulative liberal special-interest hack as well as an ignorant asshole who can’t read.

You want to apologise for that shit, I’ll accept it and we can talk. Otherwise, go fuck yourself. I’m done arguing with liberals.

The talk is about a group of players who insist that the game is inherently sexist because there are not as many female major lore figures as male major lore figures. They want the game changed and an equal number of female major lore characters introduced to ‘correct’ the ‘sexist environment’.

Opposition to this sentiment takes many forms.

Some oppose it because making any new lore figures female for the express purposes of having as many female lore figures as males is a degradation of the story (thus breaking their suspension of disbelief, or ‘immersion’). Rather than creating characters, the writers are now filling a quota that must consist of X new female ‘leads’.

The second group opposes it because they say it will lead to a flood of special interest groups all demanding representation in lore. This reflects them back to the first group’s concern, since writers would then be filling not merely one, but many quotas, instead of creating characters. Their argument is similar to ‘Once you pay the Danegeld, you will never be rid of the Dane.’

The third group opposes the feminists’ argument simply because we hate the concept of political correctness. There is too much PC in the world already, and we loathe it down to the very depths of our hearts, and we don’t want it in our goddamn games too. Again, there’s the ‘Danegeld’ argument: give into the PC crowd once, and they’ll keep pushing, and causing trouble, and finding ever more rediculous causes to champion, and you’ll never be rid of them. There’s some concern over the first two issues as well, but most of us are just tired of all the PC bullshit.

Yes, you can be in all three groups at once. I separated the three because most people stuck with a single argument in support of their position, but I did note in the descriptions of the second and third groups that they generally shared concerns with the groups before them, if to a lesser degree than their primar concern.

What is this thing about WoW not having female “lore characters” (a strange label to use BTW)

– Jaina is very much a main char. Does she cry and whimper a lot in Wrath? Yes she does – the writers are telling a tale of love lost. Is she a woman-of-action? Yes she is – she is pretty much the only one that stands up to Varian Wrynn and prevents him from attacking Thrall directly. (Her motivations for doing so is kinda besides the point – she acts in accordance with her character)

(as a note try to remember auberdine where some guy lost his wife which you find and kill as a ghost – he cries too – BECAUSE IT’S ANOTHER LOVE STORY)

– Two of the five dragon aspects are female – try telling me that the Alexstrazza is not the coolest thing in Wrath? She kicks Malygos’ ass etc.

– Night Elf society is clearly dominated by females. (are the scantly clad – yes they are – they are essentially part drow/part amazon from “classic” fiction, and is depicted accordingly – the point is that they are strong, and they rule the society.

In the end – is it balanced? Properly not – but (much) more balanced than most works of fantasy fiction you find in your bookstore.

In WoW you never:
– Rape
– Kidnap someone’s daugther or perform any other sexist act during any quest (limited by personal experience and memory)
– See any NPC’s use sexist language

In WoW you do:
– See depictions of females as equal to males (possible not numerically when counting NPC’s – but it’s not like that female NPC have fewer HP, or can’t be Elites)
– Rescue both males and female NPC’s
– Hopefully have fun and play with people you enjoy being around – regardless of gender
– Meet a ton of boys/young men who you unfortunantly have to share your server with

And yeah – in the end – it’s fiction. It’s essentially the right of Blizzard to do whatever they want with the story – it’s called artistic freedom… If they wanted to they could make it World of Stripcraft – complete with a shady cybersex establishment in the Dalaran sewer – or they could make it World of Political Correctness – complete with “The gender ratio on your chosen server currently does not allow more RL males to create a character here” messages and completly identical armor set graphics for males and females.

YOUR choice as a consumer is:
– let your opinion be known
– if Blizzard “goes against” your opinion you have the eternally granted right to quit the game

Your use of “liberal” as a derogatory throwaway negative is unsurprising. You show all the typical right-wing attitudes: victimhood and being perpetually Under Siege.

You speak of not raising one type of gamer over the other… and yet don’t you regularly join Gevlon in his “Join my cause and together we can change the WoW community” projects?

You also assume much. Unless you work for Blizzard, you CANNOT say “Blizzard designed the game for…” as proof that you are right and The Other Side are wrong. You are not aware of their strategies, so do not proclaim absolutes as SUPPORTS for your arguments. It makes you the subject for derision.

I could just as easily say “Adults should stop their efforts to reduce juvenile behaviour ingame. Adults shouldn’t be playing WoW because Blizzard explicitly designed the game for Teens. Tell Chuck Norris jokes or GTFO.”, and be no less right than you claim to be.

Perhaps this hasn’t occured to many yet, but what if it was intended to be this way to prove the [insert special interests group] right?

Akin to an old StarTrek episode which confronted how silly racism is by having a race of literally half-white half-black people (split down the middle) where those with white on one side ruled over those who had white on the other side.

Do I think this is the case? No. But, what if..? Now they’d be trying to remove Blizzards ability to make a powerful social commentary in a friendly medium and hurting their own cause.

Is “flailing” better or worse than distributing one word insults to strangers on the internet? I’ll expect a one-word insult as your response, since you’re afraid to commit “flailing.” I suppose that’s why I find your comment annoying, not that it’s crude, but your cowardice.

I was hoping to click on the Comments link and see comments relating to the topic at hand: religion.

Instead, it seems like there is still some carry over from the feminism issue, bickered about in the last few posts.

I liked the post – but I didn’t like how it got derailed by the other comments. In all honesty, you may want to consider being a bit more fervent about your filtering policies and cutting certain people off, who have obviously beaten a horse to death or who have nothing positive to contribute to threads anymore.

I’m glad you liked the post, thanks for that. Actually the topic wasn’t religion, see my disclaimer at the top of the post, but neither was it feminism, but some commenters feel that they have to beat a tired horse to death. Kurt is on his last warning, and any further comments from him on that topic will result in him being banned. I like to keep my comments free and open, I have only ever banned one person. I have a few regular commenters that regularly disagree with most of what I write, but I feel that often by leaving their comments in it can strengthen my own argument. Thus I’m happy to let themselves cut off their nose to spite their face. I realise that this can be disconecerting for viewers who have to wade through their rubbish and I will try to keep that in mind.

I would say that it would be an honor to be banned by you, but Sjonnar already made a roughly equivalent statement to that and I’d hate to praise him by emulating him. Interesting to hear that I’d been warned not to comment on that topic, since that is a lie. Interesting, but not surprising.

I wrote somewhere in the comments that you were on your last warning. Since you read and responded to everything else I assumed that you read that as well. If you think that I am personally going to contact you with your own little puff-wrapped warning note then you are very much mistaken.

Obviously, what you’re doing is bringing you increasing readership and you obviously have some noteworthy things to say and what you do say sparks conversation – so all in all, you seem to be doing just fine.

I was just making a comment in regards to my travels through the page.
🙂

This is a game. It has lore. The lore was written, and is owned by Blizzard. It’s their story.

Why are you trying to change it?

Would you go tell an author to change his story because you don’t like the tale? (This is rhetorical, people, the answer is no.)

It’s a fictional world, and they run the plot how they want to. If you don’t like it – don’t play. We get to comment on mechnics and suggest changes to how our characters work because that’s our part of the story- that’s our hunter, druid, etc. We don’t own the NPCs. We don’t get to god-Mod Blizzard’s game, which is exactly what people are trying to do.

This has blown up to beyond ridiculous, when quite frankly, it’s pretty simple.

Wow, not having read your blog for a couple weeks visiting small Italian villages… during my holidays, that was an absolutely fantastic series of posts to read.
I’m not going to join the argument, because, like Sjonnar, I’m done arguing with liberals, for quite a while already. Though I do find it very interesting that a video game is capable of causing these kinds of arguments.
Anyway, hope to see more of these kind of posts! (cause… you knpw, your priest is really boring and your rogue is kinda hibernating ;))